Table 1

Quality appraisal of included EMA studies

Topic: quality criteriaStrongModerateWeak
1. Rationale for EMA design provided: Why was an EMA design chosen to examine the research question?A strong rationale provided for the EMA design of predictor AND behaviour/ outcome.Rationale provided but not very strong for the EMA design of either the predictor OR behaviour/outcome.No rationale for the EMA design regarding predictor and behaviour/outcome.
Power analysis, sample size and participant adherence
2. Power analysis: A priori power analysis to determine sample sizeAn a priori power analysis is reported and the enrolled sample size met power analysis indication / OR: sufficient explanation as to why an a priori power analysis was not neededAn a priori power analysis is reported but sufficient sample size/number of observations was not achieved.No information about power analysis / OR: a post-hoc power analysis is reported.
3. Adherence to EMA protocol: Percentage of answered EMA prompts across all participants for the main EMA study periodPercentage of answered EMA prompts >80%.Percentage of answered EMA prompts 60%–79.99%.Percentage of answered EMA prompts <60%.
Data analysis
4. Treatment of missingness: Report whether study dropout or non-adherence to EMAs (eg, missed prompts) are related to specific variablesMissing mechanisms/predictors are identified, reported and mitigated for if needed.Missing mechanisms/predictors are identified and reported but not mitigated for.Missing mechanisms/predictors are not identified or reported.
  • EMA, ecological momentary assessment.